Exposing the evolution theory. Part 2

IntroductionSome were unsatisfied with the presentation of the evolutionary tree of the previous artist
This is an Aboriginal Australian artists impression of evolutionDNA molecule. Coded informationThe human body has about 37.2 trillion cells each of which contains a DNA molecule. DNA has a series of 4 chemicals (amino acids) which are precisely arranged to spell out a code or instructions for building the crucial parts of cells (proteins) that allow all life to exist.ToE says that evolution occurs through natural selection acting on random genetic mutation of DNA. This calls for several failed mutations to occur before one is advantageous enough to persist.The question is how common or rare are advantageous functional sequences among the possible combinations of the DNA code? The answer is 1x10^77. That’s a 10 with 77 zeros. Those odds are so big that even billions of years could not produce that many outcomes.But those are the odds to build just one new advantageous protein. Many more need to be created, trillions more. To create a new animal the proteins basically have to be arranged into structures within cells, different types of cells need to be arranged to form tissues, different tissues need to be arranged to form organs, then orangs and tissues need to be arranged to form systems and those systems need to be arranged to form a living creature. In other words DNA mutation alone cannot account for the evolution of new forms of life. This only adds to the huge improbability of ToE.I listened to another scientist who claimed this calculation was incorrect. His calculations were that the odds were 1x10^33. Its still a probability so huge you have a better chance of winning lotto I think. An illustration showing the complexity of building new life beyond the molecular level.An analogy given by scientist Stephen Meyer
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1Say for example I designed a new type of bridge, never been done before. The breakthrough is a new material I have invented. This will make the bridge stronger and cheaper to build. I go and propose this new design to my boss. He asks me how certain I am it will work. And I respond by telling him the chances of it working are 1x10^77. Should we still build it on the off chance it will work? Off course not. We go and do countless tests on this new material under various conditions and circumstances. We try to falsify the materials claims by testing it to breaking point, analyzing the data and making improved changes to this material until we are 100% certain that its properties are consistent with the requirements.That's an example of applied science and the high standards of evidence involved, for those who were confusedReference to this study by scientist Doug Axe who calculated the probability of 1x10^77
Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds - PubMed

U closed the first thread because complaints regarding your refusal to respond to your first topic adequately only after a few days. I’ve been busy. It’s the theme with evolutionists. Don’t like to be questioned.There was confusion about the term naturalism. I responded and cleared that up. I also made it clear about wanting to see pre Cambrian evolution in the fossils. And people presented it. Then u closed it down. I didn’t even get a chance to look and respond. I’ve been busy cos now im working while im off school but I shouldn’t have to explain my personal schedule. I responded to everything that was relevant but obviously got some feathers ruffled.The Discovery Institute I’ve never even heard of them.A bit miffed that you didn't fess up and tell us all that you were considering the arguments of the Intelligent Design community
What do u mean? Why does it matter who is making the arguments? By that logic it should be stated that ToE is pushed by atheists. One mob believes in God and the other doesn’t believe in God. Both positions of faith. Why should I trust either one? The only thing I believe in is knowledge. That’s why im agnostic. I don’t have to choose yes or no to the question do I believe in God. There is a 3rd option. I don’t know. You guys operate from belief. I operate from knowledge.I’m making their conclusions your conclusions even though you don't yet understand both sides of the arguments thoroughlyAnother perplexing statement. One guy copied and pasted a whole book, isn’t that the same? How are public school kids drawing conclusions? Aren’t they concluding evolution as fact? It’s what the atheists are concluding. Do they understand both sides of the argument? No. Do u see what I mean? Its fine for everyone to make the atheist conclusion their conclusion without knowing both sides. Yet there is objections when it’s turned. Why?I don’t have time to study all the details and make an argument. From where I sit I see atheists vs theists. All Im doing is presenting the points that don’t add up to me. Im not trying to argue any intelligent design. Rather I’m looking for the responses.For example the fossils presented to me don’t show evidence for a common ancestor. I can’t see where the evolution takes place. U can bombard me with words but these are fossils. If there are heaps then why can’t we arrange them to show evolution? If there isn’t heaps then the fossil record does not support ToE.And with the probability these aren’t the only guys that have come up with probabilities there are a few different ones all with different outcomes. But if go ahead and believe that its probable how does it all arrange itself from atom to a living creature like in the diagram? How many more processes are needed? Can DNA mutation alone account for all of it?Really this is just silly. Atheists being offended by some agnostic skepticism. Closing a thread after a few days. This is anti science this kind of attitude.I posed questions to theists in the last few months. Skeptical questions. Difficult questions. Criticisms. I took time in responding. I was never clear to them what my conclusions were. In fact I was very vague. But the difference in the reactions, responses and admin intervention is just unbelievable.Honestly, I don’t buy the ToE fairytale and I don’t buy the bible fairytale. But the insistence of these atheists for everyone to drop religion and start a new life is absurd. WAKE UP ATHEISTS. U DON’T BELIEVE THERE IS A GOD. BUT U DON’T KNOW THAT. UR POSITION IS ONE OF FAITH EVEN MORE DOGMATIC THAN THEISTSCan we demonstrate macro ToE in experiments? Make an animal turn into another type? Why not?
They’ve been trying since spontaneous generation and jumped straight onto ToE. They’ve produced a bunch of frauds which for me is also a deal breaker. What does a judge do when he learns the defendant has been dishonest? Fool me once shame on u fool me twice shame on me. The whole ToE is founded on frauds.Im comfortable in my belief (a rare time I use that word) that the soft sciences are corrupted by anti theist style atheists whose only objective is to destroy religion.They go around like preachers, preaching hate and lies. Preaching against western civilization. Foolishly thinking an atheist society will do better than the thousands of years that societies have come under religion. Blind to what is happening in society now cos of atheism. Blind to history that shows us what happens under atheism. Arrogance and ignorance is the sense I get from atheists. Unable to understand morals in society, the nature of humans and what is required to maintain a society.Anti theists are anti society. U could say im agnostic with Christian values. Cos I see the values created by the atheist community and where its taking us. Atheists are just too narrow minded to see the bigger picture.If there is a God then perhaps it is Satan doing his work against humanity throught the blind Atheists whoses morals have no foundation and can be easily manipulated by society.Lets kill babies, yay. Lets allow adultery and open divorce, yay. Lets allow gay matrriage, yay. Lets allow gays to expose kids to sexual material, info, etc, yay. Lets allow gays to adopt kids, yay. Lets allow kids of 8yo to choose to be gay, yay. Lets allow 8yo kids to choose to be trannies, yay. Lets encourage kids to be gay, yay. Lets give our kids puberty blockers and fund surgeries to help be trannies, yay. Lets send any man to prison on the allegation of a woman, yay. Lets make it impossible for single men to approach women, yay. Lets make it possible for women to call rape if a man doesn't do what she pleases, yay. Let's destroy relations and rewrite the rules of engagement, yay. Lets encourage promisuity in women, yay. Lets assume all men are potential killers and rapists, yay. Lets make mens lives hang on the selfishness of young atheist women that have no morals.You guys are old and married. Yas propbably wouldn't have a clue on the changes happening to the market place of single young people. This generation snowflake which im ashamed to be in are full atheists intent on destruction.Damn wrote a book. LoL. Ah well cop that. Its probably all disjointed with spelling errors but i don't really care.. Atheists can have a good sook picking it all apart to make themselves feel better. I cbf editing this or presenting the several other issues I had with ToE if people are going to cry about it. i gave em another chance a year later. I was much more measured in my approach. I wasn't rude this time but the outcome was even worse this time.

You guys have made arguing eachother some kind of art form.
Do I know how to argue mumbo jumbo. No.My studies aren't about beliefs they are about knowleadge. Although there are theoretical physicists they don't use this standard of belief and conjecture. Numbers support everything, they don't lie. Everything is easily observable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable. According to Karl Popper ToE is a pseudoscience.I thought Charles Darwin was some kind of Atheist wanker going around the world preaching against religion like they do today. I was very surprised at the humble words he uses in his book. The willingness to give arguments against his theory. His honestly. And above all the fact that he died Agnostic... Respect... If only todays scientists were this open minded.Anyway enough of my rants. I stand by my statement over a year ago which made atheists cry..."Knowledge comes from knowing u don't know everything"

Yas hate to be questioned. The proof is here. People having a sook.Stick around. U closed it in only a few days. People understood what I was asking for and presented it. Thanks to them. Closing it only shows fear.Blah blah blah don't listen to them. Listen to us. If I shouldn't listen to theists why should I listen to atheists who are preaching this crap? Who have no moral boundaries? Explain to me how the fuck im meant to get layed under this atheist society? Atheists seemingly have no knowledge on human nature, history and society? Their argument to widely held skepticism is ad homen fallicy among others. Your beliefs are founded on frauds like piltdown man, fake horse and moth evolution, hoax embryos. U think this field deserves to be believed? Does it deserve the respect and funding it gets over the rest of us after the systematic lies? U can't be reasonable if u expect me to overlook the lies.I follow knowledge not the irrational beliefs of atheists or theists.Look at how the theists handled my skeptic questions compared to the atheist's. With class and dignity. Seriously. Why so hostile to simple questioning? Was I rude?Like u avoided my conclusion on the fossils and didn't try offering an explination as to how DNA mutation can account for the rest of it.
How were u guys going to handle the rest of the parts I was going to present if yas blew up on the first one...Seriously biology needs to stop engaging in theological discussions before any credibility is restored.

Bahahahahshaha. OMG. That is hilarious.
An interesting insight into the atheist darwinistic mind.
ToE Delusional... Case closed...

Exposed as frauds again by a school kid. Hehehe
And why moderator did u reject my subject on sociogenesis the other week???
Cos ur afraid that's why. Afraid like all the evolutionists and atheists of faith
Pathetic excuse for a science. Disgraceful

Atheism. The mindless destruction of western civilization

Science = Knowledge = AgnosticReligion = Belief = Theism/Atheism

Zedong Mao. Communist China. FailPol Pot. Socialist Cambodia. FailJoseph Stalin. Soviet Union. FailAdolph Hitler. Nazi Germany. FailAre these Atheist arrogant, ignorant or both???

100 scientists were surveyed and asked
What are the chances of ToE being completely correct?Answers varied from 0% to 100%Varying levels of FAITH as some BELIEVE it more than others
Hardly a science when they can't even agree on it